Polaris Reportedly Doubles Performance Per Watt

[N3v3r3nding_Newb]

According to the website "mobipicker," AMD's head, Srinivasan M., said that Polaris will double performance per watt.

 

http://www.mobipicker.com/amds-polaris-to-double-performance-per-watt-india-head-srinivasan-m/

[MEC-777]

They also said the Fury X would be "an overclocker's dream"...

[Suika]

Let's see how well AMD can keep that promise, we all know NVIDIA couldn't.

[TheRandomness]

5 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

They also said the Fury X would be "an overclocker's dream"...

Well, the Sapphire one with the non reference PCB (The non X Fury) does overclock quite nicely

[givingtnt]

--double performance per watt

--chip takes half the watts

[MEC-777]

6 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Well, the Sapphire one with the non reference PCB (The non X Fury) does overclock quite nicely

You can call it what it is; a "Fury". People should know by now that a Fury is not a Fury X and not have to keep referring to them as "non X" Fury's.  

 

From what I've heard/read, some Fury's can get up around 1200. This isn't what many would consider an overclocker's dream. Most of the bigger Maxwell chips (GTX 970 and up) can easily hit 1400+ without adding voltage. But I suppose 1200 is a decent OC for an AMD card. That's about the max I could get on my R9 290's and that did yield a significant performance gain. 

 

And yes, I know clock for clock is not the same comparing different architectures. I'm simply referring to the % of OC above stock.

[SuperShires]

6 minutes ago, givingtnt said:

--double performance per watt

--takes half the watts

Still ideal though, same performance but have the watts? I'd buy.

[NinjaJc01]

Eh, my 750 Ti is still one of the best cards for performance per watt, is it not?

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, SuperShires said:

Still ideal though, same performance but have the watts? I'd buy.

No thanks. I'd rather have more performance for the same wattage. We're talking about having one less light bulb in your house worth of savings.

[iamdarkyoshi]

Good, so maybe once they can get quadruple the performance per watt then they can compete with others

 

/s

 

It is nice to see this though

[Samfisher]

4 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

No thanks. I'd rather have more performance for the same wattage. We're talking about having one less light bulb in your house worth of savings.

What kind of lightbulbs do you use that take 150w to power?

[SuperShires]

4 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

No thanks. I'd rather have more performance for the same wattage. We're talking about having one less light bulb in your house worth of savings.

Theres more than saving money for benefits with reduced wattage you know. Yeah I would rather have more power but some people like lower wattage on GPUs.

[iamdarkyoshi]

1 minute ago, Samfisher said:

What kind of lightbulbs do you use that take 150w to power?

I have a 900W one

[ivan134]

2 minutes ago, Samfisher said:

What kind of lightbulbs do you use that take 150w to power?

Oh sorry, 2 light bulbs. Much savings.

[Samfisher]

1 minute ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

I have a 900W one

Those are spotlights, not regular home lights so saying its 1 lightbulb of saving is not universal nor is it even accurate for 99.9% of the population.

[Delicieuxz]

Does lower wattage also mean quieter fan cooling?

 

I hope Polaris is a home-run for ATI, by way of dominating in performance over Nvidia. Graphics hardware has been stagnating, and increasing by meager amounts, for far too many years.

[iamdarkyoshi]

Just now, Samfisher said:

Those are spotlights, not regular home lights so you saying its 1 lightbulb of saving is not universal nor is it even accurate for 99.9% of the population.

Not even spotlights, more a friggin heater... It came out of a laser printer's fuser. Great source of high power low efficiency lights...

 

I did think about using one to heat my 3D printer enclosure, but a 250W heating element did perfect

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, SuperShires said:

Theres more than saving money for benefits with reduced wattage you know. Yeah I would rather have more power but some people like lower wattage on GPUs.

Those people should go buy consoles or buy a laptop with Zen APUs when they release.

[iamdarkyoshi]

I would certainly like a lower power GPU for my passive project... This why I am trying to sell my 390x and go for a nano, more performance and like 100W less

[givingtnt]

20 minutes ago, SuperShires said:

Still ideal though, same performance but have the watts? I'd buy.

not when the competition has done it 2 times allredy

[Doobeedoo]

Definitely great to hear. I doubt they'd double the performance with same watt hehe but I'm sure it will be a significant jump. It would really make sense with all new architectural improvements and smaller node.

[ivan134]

4 minutes ago, givingtnt said:

not when the competition has done it 2 times allredy

If by twice, you mean once, I agree with you. Although, I cant wait to see your face when Pascal releases if you dont know how Maxwell's efficiency was achieved.

[patrickjp93]

They say this every generation, with CPUs too! This shouldn't be news anymore 

[SuperShires]

14 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Those people should go buy consoles or buy a laptop with Zen APUs when they release.

But that makes no sense, some people like less heat emitted, me being one of them also less noise because of said heat reduction. I dont get your arguement of "if you want a lower wattage GPU go buy a console or laptop"

[patrickjp93]

5 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

If by twice, you mean once, I agree with you. Although, I cant wait to see your face when Pascal releases if you dont know how Maxwell's efficiency was achieved.

You forget Nvidia is getting a double node shrink too. I doubt we're going to see Thermi Part 3.